|
|
Posted by Bill Vermillion on 10/23/05 14:35
In article <59cml1lth3bkhecmdltb4uvtp0dua5feo3@4ax.com>,
Mark Spatny <vfxproducer@nospamh0tmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:55:07 -0700, <normanstrong@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>When I watch a 2.35:1 letterboxed picture on my 4:3 television I'm acutely
>>aware of the arbitrary cut in the vertical direction.
>
>It's not arbitrary, it's carefully composed. When the director and DP
>look through the camera, they can see where the cut-off line will be,
>and they make the decision with carefull consideration.
>
>>When you see a head
>>cut off that clearly could have been shown in its entirety you have a
>>slightly unpleasant reaction. At least I do.
>That's you. Most people will relate to the characters more strongly if
>the picture emphasizes the parts of the face that convey expressionn.
>That generally means making the eyes and mouth more prominant in the
>frame, even it that cuts off the top of the forehead.
And last week - perhaps it was on The Fox Movie Channel - there was
a film that really should have been shown in letterbox. A two-shot
had the left eye of the person on the right side of the screen and
the right eye of the person on the left side of the screen.
So the scene had two half-heads talking.
That really cried out for P&S - reframing depending on who was
talking - but I've notice more and more that P&S is not being used
and just the center of the film is being shown. It's cheaper that
way.
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|